Julien v Racing Penalties Appeals Tribunal of Western Australia & Anor

[2001] WASCA 345

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Natural justice
3. › Bias
4. › Reasonable apprehension of bias
5. › Domestic or consensual tribunal
6. › Same panel reconsidering matter after successful appeal
7. › Whether prior adverse credibility findings gave rise to reasonable apprehension of bias
8. › Whether actual bias or reasonable apprehension test applies to consensual tribunals
1. Administrative Law
2. › Certiorari
3. › Error of law on the face of the record
4. › Decision of Racing Penalties Appeals Tribunal
5. › Whether Tribunal erred in not finding reasonable apprehension of bias
1. Associations and clubs
2. › Greyhound racing
3. › Stewards' inquiry
4. › Breach of racing rules
5. › Prohibited substance in greyhound
6. › Re-hearing by same panel of Stewards
7. › Western Australian Greyhound Racing Authority Act 1981 (WA), s 6, s 7B
8. › Greyhound Racing Rules 1973, r 234(7)

Quick Take

The same panel of stewards may conduct a re-hearing of a matter remitted by an appeals tribunal, even where the panel made adverse credibility findings at the first hearing, provided the re-hearing is conducted properly and the conclusions are justified by the evidence. However, it is preferable for a different panel to be used. The question whether the test for bias in consensual/domestic tribunals is actual bias or reasonable apprehension of bias remains unresolved.